HomeMy WebLinkAboutPermit Demolition 2008-4-11
Status
Issued
225 Fifth Street, Springfield, OR
541-726-3753 Phone
541-726-3676 Fax
541-726-3769 Inspection Line
SITE ADDRESS: 640 C ST
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO.: 1703352411600
CITY OF SPRINGFIELD
Building/Combination Permit
PERMIT NO: COM2008-00S08
ISSUED: 04/11/2008
APPLIED: 04/11/2008
EXPIRES: 10/11/2008
VALUE:
Springfield TYPE OF WORK: Site Work Only
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Demolish detached garage
Owner: TERESA HENSLEY
Address: 640 C ST
SPRINGFIELD OR 97477
Contractor Type
General
Contractor
OWNER
TYPE OF USE: DemolItion
Residential
Phone Number: 541-687-7295
I CONTRACTOR INFORMATION I
I PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS'
Storm Sewer Atf&r/cE.
Special InstrucmS PEReMIT SHAll EXPIRE fF THE WORK
Notes: AUTHORIZED UNDER THIS PERMIT IS NOT
COMMENCEn OR Ie;: AO,,^ND~Nr-D ror.
ANY 180 DAY PERIOD - I -. I
. Valuation Description
BUILDING INFORMATION I
$ Per Sq Ft
or multiplier
Square Footage
or Bid Amount
License
Expiration Date Phone
Lot Size:
Sq Ft 1st Floor:
Sq Ft 2nd Floor:
Sq Ft Basement:
Sq Ft Garage/Carport
Sq Ft Other:
Occupant Load:
# of Units: # of Stories:
Primary Occupancy Group: U Height of Structure
Secondary Occupancy Group: Type of Heat:
Primary Construction Type VB Water Type:
Secondary Constr,.\~tf<Lq\l~-rle~~' Oregon law requir~~ 'fiype:
# of Bedrooms: follow riJIl::s adopted by the Oreb~~~th:
Notification Center. Those rules aSp$OiIfbnltBuilding n/a
III :-A'":: :::':.J~ 93~: ~h:-::.:~r ~ ^.~ '::':! ':'~~
0090. You may obtain COI~DEMEilJJVlRMEJlSJJ INFORMATION I
calling the center. (Not : U1~ l~l~pIlUII~
number for the Oregon Utility Notification.
F~ontyard SetbaCK: Center is 1_800_332_234D.verlay DISt:
SIde 1 Setback: if'Street Trees Rqd:
Side 2 Setback: Paved Drive Rqd:
Rearyard Setback: % of Lot Coverage:
Solar Setbacks:
Street Improvements:
Description
Tvpe of Construction
Pal!:e 1 of 2
REQUIRED PARKING
Total:
Handicapped:
Compact:
Sidewalk Type:
Downspouts/Drains:
Value
Date Calculated
Status
Issued
CITY OF SPRINGFIELD -
Building/Combination Permit
PERMIT NO: COM2008-00508
ISSUED: 04/11/2008
APPLIED: 04/11/2008
EXPIRES: 10/11/2008
VALUE:
225 Fifth Street, Springfield, OR
541-726-3753 Phone
541-726-3676 Fax
541-726-3769 Inspection Line
Total Value of Project
Fees Paid'
Fee Description
+ 10% Administrative Fee
+ 12% State Surcharge
+ 5% Technology Fee
Demolition
Amount Paid
Date Paid
Receipt Number
$5.00
$6.00
$2.50
$50.00
4/11/08
4/11/08
4/11/08
4/11/08
2200800000000000447
2200800000000000447
2200800000000000447
2200800000000000447
Total Amount Paid
$63.50
I Plan Reviews I
To Request an inspection call the 24 hour recording at 726-3769. All inspections requested before 7:00
a.m. will be made the same working day, inspections requested after 7:00 a.m. will be made the following
work day.
I ReQuired InsDections .
Demolition: After demolition is complete, sewer is capped or septic is pumped and filled and inspection is
requested and approved, and all debris is removed from the site.
By signature, I state and agree, that I have carefully examined the completed application and do hereby certify that all
information hereon is true and correct, and I further certify that any and all work performed shall be done in accordance with
the Ordinances of the City of Springfield and the Laws of the State of Oregon pertaining to the work described herein, and
that NO OCCUPANCY will be made ofany structure without permission of the Community Services Division, Building Safety.
I further certify that only contractors and employees who are in compliance with ORS 701.005 will be used on this project.
I further agree to ensure that all required inspections are requested at the proper time, that each address is readable from the
street, that the permit card is located at the front of the property, and the approved set of plans will remain on the site at all
times during construction.
\/ ,;;;(~ 1///-0%
Owner or Contractors Signature Date
Pal!e 2 of 2
225 Fifth Street
Spring{iekt, Oregon 97477
541-.:]26-3759 Phone
Job/Journal Number
COM2008-00508
COM2008-00508
COM2008-00508
COM2008-00508
Payments:
Type of Payment
CredltCard
cRecemtl
RECEIPT #:
DescriptIOn
DemolitIOn
+ 5% Technology Fee
+ 12% State Surcharge
+ 10% Admlntstratlve Fee
Paid By
TERESA HENSLEY
City of Springfield Official Receipt
Development Services Department
Public Works Department
2200800000000000447
Date: 04/11/2008
Item Total:
Check Number Authorization
Received By Batch Number Number How Received
dJb 07607C In Person
Payment Total:
Page 1 of 1
11 :39:00AM
Amount Due
5000
250
600
500
$63.50
Amount Paid
$63 50
$63.50
4/11/2008
.,
SPIIUNGiFIIE'.LD
225 FIFTH STREET. SPRINGFIELD, OR 97477 . PH:(541)726-3753 . FAX: (541)726-3689
-
DEMOLITION PERMIT APPLICATION
Address:
(pt.{o
C-
s+-
Structure to be Demolished:
~
{)o..v-o...ce...
.s
Job Number: COt1A7~o~- QOS-6Z
The applicant is hereby notified that any redevelopment of the subject site must
comply with all of the applicable laws, codes, ordinances, polices and plans in
effect at the time the redevelopment proposal is accepted as complete for City
review. This would include correction of substandard conditions associated with
the present development. Examples of such corrections may include
modification of inadequate drainage facilities; compliance with building set-
backs from property lines; correction of substandard sidewalks and street
improvements, including driveway width and placement; and other corrections
which may be necessary to comply with existing development standards.
Furthermore, if an existing use is demolished or otherwise removed prior to the
development of the proposed use, then the system development charge credit for
the previously existing use shall expire two years after the date of issuance of the
demolition permit or other removal of the previously existing use. (Springfield
Municipal Code 3-416(1)).
My signature below indicates that I have read and understand the above
conditions relating to the demolition of the above mentioned structure.
.Y /,Al~-
Signature
1-// of{'
Date
ATTENTION: Oregon law requires ynu t,o
follow rules adopted by tl1e Oregon Ud:::Y
Notification Center. Those rules ale set fa, [11
In OAR 952-001-001 0 through O^~185?-CI)1-
0090. You may obtain copies of (118 ~ ;'l~;:, J
calling the center. (Note: tl18 ts:srJ:--, - -I'
number for the Oregon Uti lilY No~' "c.,? - J-\
Center is 1-800-332-234[f).
;{OTICE: E WORK
THIS PERMIT SHALL EXPIRE IF TH
J\UTHORIZED UNDER THIS PERMIT IS NOT
COMMENCED OR IS ABANDONED FOR
ANY 180 DAY PERIOD.
SPRINGFIELD
225 FIFTH STREET. SPRINGFIELD, OR 97477 . PH:(541)726-3753 . FAX: (541)726-3689
-
DEMOLITION PERMIT APPLICATIONS
Your demolition permit is currently being processed. There may be a slight delay, of
up to 2 working days for small structures, due to the time required to review the
history of the structure to determine if it needs to be documented before demolition.
This documentation is for archival purposes only and will not affect the granting of
the demolition permit. If the structure is very large or complicated the
documentation process may take up to a maximum of 4 working days.
Documentation will consist of photographing the building, taking measurements and
making scaled drawings. The documentation will be undertaken by the City at no cost
to you. Documentation is being done on all structures dated prior to 1940 that may
have historic importance to the City's development.
THIS DOCUMENTATION WILL NOT IMPEDE THE DEMOLITION PROCESS.
An age cut-off of 1940 was chosen because this is the date that the National Parks
Service and The Springfield Development Code use to determine potential historic
significance.
If you would prefer to complete this documentation yourself you must provide the
City with the following information: l)~~Pd white photographs of each
elevation, a floor plan with measureme 10 ~aT.t~N:~~~\a~~9win8s with
w rutes adopted b h ymJ 0
measurements. Notification C y t e Oregoll ~~I : I"
in OAR 9'" enter. Those rdles 2:9 ~"" r,
Th k.c' o2-001-00iOthrotf:'ih C"'; n ,
an you lor your patIence. 0090. You may OD' tal'n ~ s .' ,'t J,'
'" caplE'S c_ "
cal mg the center (i\lr, '" '
, ,\jut_ 1,1C'
number for the OJ egnll I_'~ I,
Center IS 1-800-J"
I grant the City of Springfield permission to enter my property to complete
documentation prior to the requested demolition of the structure located at:
Address: t.e y 0 c.. 5\-
Property Owner Signature:....,.~ /'~~
I p
Job Number: g- oos-~g Date: 4-1/~ o~
:'1'171r''=-
H. ,. . [\.~ L:;.
Tt-IIS J.>l:RMIT SHALL EXPIRE IF THE W~RK
AUTHOHIZED UNDER THIS PERMIT IS NOT
COMMENCED OR IS ABANDONED FOR
ANY 180 DAY PERIOD.
~.
mSTORICAL REVIEW APPLICATION, TYPE I
MINOR ALTERATIONS: ACCESSORY STRUCTURE DEMOLITION
,
City of Springfield
Development Services Department
225 Fifth Street
Springfield, OR 97477
DATE: M~ch 13,2008
File Number: DRC2008-00020
640 'c' Street, Springfield, Oregon
Owner and Applicant:
Teresa Hensley (Shannon Kellow)
640 C Street
Springfield, OR 97477
Type I, mSTORICAL SITE PLAN DECISION: Pending review and approval by
the Springfield Historical Commission, on March 11, 2008, staff recommends, as
conditioned herein, the applicant's request for demolition of a fire-damaged
accessory structure located at the rear of 640 C Street.
SITE LOCATION:
640 'c' Street, Springfield, Oregon, Assessor Map 17-03-35-24 Tax Lot 11600,
Washburne Historic District, Historic Overlay District.
mSTORY OF APPLICATION PROCESS
Property owner, Teresa Hensley, contacted staff on May 8, 2007 to discuss the
demolition of a fue-damaged garage located on the rear of her property. Staff advised
Hensley that there was an application process, which would require both a fee and a
minimum of two, independent assessments of the condition of the garage.
NATURE OF APPLICATION AND SITE INFORMATION: The applicant has
submitted a proposal to demolish a fue-damaged garage because it is 1) structurally
unsafe for use, and 2) the cost of repairs exceed both the economic and historical value of
the structure. Two contractors have advised the applicant that the cost of the fire repairs;
the cost of restoration repairs; and, the cost to put a foundation under the accessory
structure, would far exceed 50 percent of the value and replacement costs of the structure.
Research of office records by staff did not reveal any specific information pertaining to
the garage. There is no 1984 survey information on the structure. The Summer 2003
Property Information up-date survey includes a notation that refers to the garage as an
"associated resource c.1924 garage". Staff did not fmd any historical survey records that
describe the style or materials used in the garage. No records were found that described
the condition of the garage prior to, or after, the 1998 fire damage.
The 1998 fue originated next door in the neighbor's garage at 626 'c' Street. The west
end of the applicant's structure and the roofwere severely damaged. The roof of the
1
structure has been covered with heavy plastic for the last 10 years and no repairs have
been initiated during that time. The structure is beginning to lean off center.
Staff photographed the garage on February 12,2008. It is a wooden structure
approximately 19' x 25'; there are no windows; there i~ an 8' door that opens onto the
alley (north elevation); on the east elevation there is another 8' opening that is boarded up
with plywood; there is a door on the south elevation; it is single-story with a gable roof
and wood, 4" lap siding.
REVIEW DECISION:
After review by the Springfield Historical Commission on March 11, 2008, the
applicant's request to demolish the garage was approved as conditioned herein.
The Commission's March 11,2008 decision is for demolition and disposal of the existing
fITe-damaged accessory structure, only; this decision does not extend to construction of a
new garage. New construction will require a Type II Historical Site Plan Review.
REVIEW PROCEDURES AND CRITERIA mSTORICAL REVIEW. TYPE I
Procedural Finding #1: Pursuant to SDC Section 5.1.125, Type I decisions are made by
the Director without public notice and without a public hearing; however, SDC Section
3.3-100 states: The regulations of the overlay district shall supplement the regulations of
the underlying zoning district. In cases where the regulations conflict, the overlay
district regulations shall supersede the underlying zoning district regulations.
Staff, as representative of the Director, has made recommendations to the Historical
Commission regarding the applicant's proposal and the Commission, pursuant to SDC
Section 3.3-915 C 1, has reviewed and approved, as conditioned, the applicant's request.
Procedural Finding #2: Pursuant to SDC Section 3.3-905 the purpose of SDC 3.3-900
is to encourage the restoration, preservation, and adaptive use of the City of Springfield's
Historic Landmark Structures and Sites. Furthermore, Section 3.3-900 implements the
historic policies of the Metro Plan, the Washburne JIistoric Landmark District, Chapter I
of the Springfield Code (1965), and OAR Chapter 660.
Procedural Finding #3: Pursuant to SDC Section 3.3-910 A, all structures and sites
within the Washburne Historic Landmark District are subject to the regulations ofSDC
3.3-900.
CRITERIA OF REVIEW AND APPROVAL :
Procedural Finding #4: Pursuant to SDC Section 3.3-915 C 1, demolition of an
accessory structure shall be reviewed under a Type I procedure.
2
Procedural Finding #5: Pursuant to SDC Section 3.3-915 C 1, on March 7, 2008 the
applicant submitted a Type I application as directed by staff, which was presented to the
Springfield Historical Commission on March 11, 2008.
PROCEDURAL REVIEW CRITERIA FOR DEMOLITION OF ACCESSORY
STRUCTURE
Springfield Development Code Section 3.3-950 Demolition Standards.
Criteria (A) through (C) apply to demolition of historic landmark structures within
the H-OVERLAY DISTRICT.
Review Criteria (A): (SDC Section 3.3-950 A) No demolition permit will be granted
for any Historic Landmark site or structure unless the owner has demonstrated to
the satisfaction of the Historical Commission that one of the following criteria
applies:
Criteria A-I: The condition of the Historic Landmark Structure constitutes a serious and
immediate threat to the safety of the public or occupants, which cannot be eliminated
without repairs that would exceed 50 percent of the value of the structure itself.
Criteria A-2: The property owner has demonstrated that there would be no reasonable
long-term economic benefit from preservation of the Historic Landmark structure. In
making this determination, the owner shall demonstrate that all potential uses or adaptive
uses for the Historic structure have been thoroughly examined.
· Finding #4: After the 1998 fire, the applicant covered the roof of the garage with
heavy plastic to prevent further weather damage. In June of 2007 the applicant
had the garage inspected by two licensed contractors. Both contractors agreed
that due to years of neglect of the c 1924 structure and due to the damage caused
by the 1998 fire, the structure was not only a safety hazard, but that repairs
would exceed 50 percent of the value of the structure itself The contractors
estimated that it would cost approximately $30,000.00 to install a concrete floor,
replace the necessary structural members, replace the roof, and scrape and paint
the exterior lap siding. Criteria A -1 has been met because the garage has been
determined to be unsafe andfire-damage repair costs will exceed 50 percent of
the value of the struqture itself
· Finding #5: Prior to the fire, it is presumed by staff that the garage was in need
of extensive structural repairs due to the deterioration of the roof and interior
weather damage. The structure did not originally have a foundation and the
ground-contact mud seal members are rotten. Consequently, any preservation
and adaptive use of the garage would require a concrete foundation and
replacement of 100 percent of the, original structure's mud seals and lower siding.
Criteria A-2 has been met because potential uses or adaptive uses require
unreasonable economic costs due to extensive replacement of original materials.
The end result would be a historic-looking garage reconstructed of all new
3
materials and partially covered with the original 4" lap siding The applicant has
an estimate of approximately $24,000.00 to demolish and replace the garage.
Review Criteria (B): (SDC Section 3.3-950 B) If a Historic Landmark Site or
Structure is permitted to be demolished, the property owner shall provide the
Historical Commission with:
Criteria B-1: Four sets of measured drawings prepared by a qualified draftsperson
showing the primary floor plans and the primary exterior elevation.
Criteria B-2: A set of photographs that document the exterior and interior details
including significant architectural elements.
· Finding #6: The applicant did not submit a measured drawing of the garage;
however, she did submit an extensive set of photograph, which documents both
the exterior and the interior details of the structure. Staff finds that both the
applicant's photographs and the existing photographs that are in the office file
are sufficient for historical purposes; therefore, both Criteria B-1 and Criteria B-
2 have been met.
Review Criteria (C): The property owner shall also supply the Historical
Commission with any artifact or other architectural element as identified by the
Commission. The artifact or architectural element shall be carefully removed and
delivered to the Commission in good condition to be used in future conservation
work.
· Finding #7: Criteria C does not apply because there are no artifacts or
architectural elements of merit identified within or on the structure.
CONCLUSION:
The applicant's request for approval to seek a demolition permit to remove a fire-
damaged, deteriorating garage from the property at 640 'c' Street is hereby
approved because it satisfies the criterion as listed herein.
WHAT NEEDS TO BE DONE NEXT:
Prior to any demolition of the garage, the applicant shall discuss the proposal with the
Springfield Building Department and determine if a demolition permit is necessary.
There is no appeal process for a Type I application; however, if the applicant is
dissatisfied with this decision, a Type 2 application may be submitted and reviewed by
the Historical Commission a second time. If the Historical Commission reaches the same
decision, then the applicant may submit an Appeal to the Planning Commission.
If additional information is required please contact Kitti Gale @ 726-3632 or after
March 28, 2008, contact Supervisor, Linda Pauly @ 726-4608.
4
~
'I
1"
"
.,... ~::.' -~-
.4__j_ _
.~
.<
"':"-~..,,,....
.....:-1:........""-.
"-\;,J...-
','
.'